There has recently been a discussion thread on the FF@ ListServer concerning the advisability of carrying a gun for personal protection. I posted one point of view on the discussion and received a rather challenging reply. My original post and the reply I received can be viewed here. The purpose of this article is to provide my response to Mark’s e-mail challenging my position without taking up additional bandwidth in a forum that is dedicated to fly fishing.

Mark asked three direct questions – “Have you killed a human? Have you ever protected yourself with a firearm? Have you ever had a firearm held on you?” The answer to all three of these is, unfortunately, yes. I did so as a member of the U.S. Army in South Vietnam, but, no matter how justified my actions, I still consider what I did reprehensible. The point to be made, I believe, is, to paraphrase Robert E. Lee, “It is good that killing is so horrible, or we might grow to like it.”

Mark’s letter pointed out a couple of instances, terrible ones, to be sure, in which women were killed. He contends they would have had a better chance of surviving had they been armed. I don’t necessarily disagree with his point, but carrying a firearm would not necessarily have ensured their survival.

The key point, I feel, that most people miss is that owning and carrying a firearm is relatively simple. Using that firearm to kill, or even injure, another human being is an entirely different issue. And until you have been the position of having to point and shoot at another person, I don’t care how much training you have had, you simply cannot know how you will react.

There are three possible reactions when it comes to using a firearm to defend oneself. The first is panic. I saw many “newbies” in Vietnam panic and begin wildly and indiscriminately firing their rifles the first time they came under fire. Such a reaction will not generally save one’s life. In the instances Mark referenced, the women in question would probably have been able to fire at most two shots before they were overpowered by their attackers. If those shots are fired in a panicked state of mind, there is a good chance they would have missed and the firearm would have ended up in the hands of the attackers.

The second possible reaction is to hesitate, in which case the attacker has an opportunity to overpower the attackee and wrest the gun from their hand. Again, the attackee is on the losing end. In my first encounter in which I had to use my rifle to defend myself, I hesitated and, had I been alone, I would most likely have been killed.

The third reaction, and the only on that carries a high probability for saving your life, is the calm, deliberate, accurate use of the firearm to defend yourself. Unfortunately, this is not the demeanor most people are able to adopt in their first encounter; it takes a number of such situations to inure oneself to the emotional conflict over taking a life.

At this point, I should probably admit that I am a strong proponent of increased gun control. Please note that I said “gun control,” not repeal of the Second Amendment, the Right to Bear Arms.

I have no issue with those who enjoy sport shooting and are willing to undertake the appropriate training and exercise the proper precautions over access to their guns. I don’t even have an issue with an individual carrying a gun for self defense, in certain settings. Walking down Fifth Avenue in New York is not somewhere I would like to see anyone other than a law enforcement official carrying a gun.

But, if someone buys a gun for “protection” and does not receive the proper training on how to handle the firearm or doesn’t exercise prudent precautions over access to it, I have a real problem.

Last year, in a nearby township, some teens were having a party without any parents at home. One thing led to another, the kid who lived in the house started playing around with his father’s handgun and he ended up shooting and killing his best friend. Whom should I pity more, the women in Mark’s examples or the kid who was killed because his friend had inappropriate access to a firearm? For every instance Mark can cite in which someone might not have been killed had they been carrying a gun, I believe I can find an instance in which someone would still be alive if a gun had not been available. They’re all tragedies.

Mark states in his e-mail to me that, “I encourage women and men to purchase firearms, learn how to use them, apply for conceal carry permits, and confidently carry their firearms anywhere they are legally allowed, whether that be while fishing, hiking, biking, driving, shopping, or worshipping.”

This gives me a rather creepy feeling, because I have visions of a mother carrying a gun in her purse, stopping to dash into a store while she leaves both her purse and her toddler in the car, the toddler rummaging through Mom’s purse, finding the gun and accidentally shooting himself. And if I have to worry about defending myself while I am shopping or worshipping, I think I’ll find another place to shop and worship.

We spend a large amount of time and money regulating the right to drive a car and the driving once that right is granted. Kids take driver’s education in school. Why shouldn’t we expend a comparable effort toward the regulation and training in the use of firearms? This is gun control. This is just common sense.